AlexAP
Kraken
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2020
- Posts
- 13,389
- Reputation
- 27,846
So many people believe that in the future, robots will steal all our jobs and humans will become poor and starve to death unless everyone gets an UBI. This is absolutely false.
Argument: "Automation kills jobs, so many people will become unemployed in the future."
Wrong. Automation creates wealth because it frees up resources that can then be used to create other goods and services. For example, before the Industrial Revolution, most people were peasants. After new agricultural technology emerged, there was no need for so many peasants, so new sectors emerged and all the people found employment in these new sectors. These meant more goods and services (economic growth).
The same will happen with automation in the future. Automation will kill many jobs, cashiers and mailmen may disappear in the future. But over time, this will lead to the emergence of new sectors that will create new jobs that will produce more goods and services that didn't exist before (economic growth). Automation is almost always about making some tasks unnecessary (killing jobs). If there is a new technology that doesn't kill at least some jobs, it's probably not a new technology.
Argument: "But most of todays jobs are useless, and at some point there is nothing more new to produce."
Wrong. The jobs most people have today aren't "bullshit-jobs". The vast majority of all jobs exist because they fulfill a demand that other people have, no matter how small that demand may be. Of course, society could survive without many jobs that exist today, but society could survive without many things (in fact, society could survive without all things that are not existential needs). That doesn't mean that these things aren't demands that can be supplied.
And the good thing about the economy is: Human needs are infinite(*). That means, there will always be something new to produce. I don't have any idea how a future economy might look like, just like I couldn't have predicted the economy of 2000 if I would have lived in 1900. But here are two things that I think could easily happen:
- Space economy could become big. Space tourism, asteroid mining, astrobiology (studying possible lifeforms and biotopics in space), space cartography (finding and mapping stars and planets), asteroid detection and protection, space law and others. Millions of people could be employed there.
- Virtual reality could hit off. Developers could create entire VR parks that are visited everyday by millions of people who want to experience another worlds (theme parks could include the Middle Ages, the World Wars, living the life of a modern-age celebrity, etc.). The VR economy could employ millions.
These are just examples of what could happen in the future. There will never be "no jobs" and masses of unemployed people. Humans are creative enough to always find new needs that need workers to be fulfilled. That doesn't mean that there won't be big changes in the job market, of course. The biggest changes will be: We will very probably work fewer hours (we could have a 20-hour work week in 2100) and many of todays small tasks will be automated.
(*)Human needs are infinite, but material things in the world are not infinite. But human needs are not only material (look at the entertainment industry), and, more importantly, with new technologies we don't need to use more materials for creating more goods and services. For example, if we manage to have nuclear fusion someday, we could provide energy for trillions of humans in all of the solar system with a relative small amount of water that exists on Earth.
Argument: "But what if robots become able to do EVERYTHING someday? Isn't there the danger that the poor will become all unemployed and starve to death without an UBI?"
No. If robots will be someday able to do everything that humans do - which i think will take very, very long (centuries, if not millennia) - there are two possible outcomes. Both are not dangerous for humans. One is realistic, the other one unrealistic.
The unrealistic outcome: The robots do everything for free for everyone. They grow food, build houses and streets, produce all necessary materials and even do all the bureaucratic tasks. No one has to work anymore. Everyone lives a life without wageslaving and still has everything he or she needs to survive. Basically the paradise. This is unrealistic because the robots will most likely have private owners, and the owners won't give everything for free for others.
The realistic outcome: The robots will do everything for free only for the rich. The rich will have all their food, houses, other possessions an so on provided by the robots and don't need to pay any worker any money. What happens then? Of course, the non-rich will grow food the traditional way, you know, with agriculture; the non-rich will build houses the traditional way, you know, with workers instead of robots; and they will do all the other things the traditional way.
Why would the non-rich become poor and starve to death because of automation? It makes no sense. The non-rich will not forget how to grow food just because the rich will have their robots who grow food for them. It's literally impossible that anyone will starve in an industrialized country if not for solely political reasons that lead to food shortages (war, socialist economic planning).
So, no matter what happens, there will be no need for an UBI, and there will be no mass unemployment and starvation because of automation. The job market will change for sure, but jobs will very much do exist. And with it, some jobs will pay more than others, some people will be rich, other poor, social classes will continue to exist. Money and status will continue to be an important part of SMV.
TL;DR:
- Automation kills jobs, but this frees up resouces that can and will be used for new sectors that will create new jobs.
- Human needs are infinite, so there will be always be new sectors that can emerge.
- Even if robots become able to do EVERYTHING someday, humans won't starve, they will either never have to work again or continue to produce all the things they need with the traditional methods.
Argument: "Automation kills jobs, so many people will become unemployed in the future."
Wrong. Automation creates wealth because it frees up resources that can then be used to create other goods and services. For example, before the Industrial Revolution, most people were peasants. After new agricultural technology emerged, there was no need for so many peasants, so new sectors emerged and all the people found employment in these new sectors. These meant more goods and services (economic growth).
The same will happen with automation in the future. Automation will kill many jobs, cashiers and mailmen may disappear in the future. But over time, this will lead to the emergence of new sectors that will create new jobs that will produce more goods and services that didn't exist before (economic growth). Automation is almost always about making some tasks unnecessary (killing jobs). If there is a new technology that doesn't kill at least some jobs, it's probably not a new technology.
Argument: "But most of todays jobs are useless, and at some point there is nothing more new to produce."
Wrong. The jobs most people have today aren't "bullshit-jobs". The vast majority of all jobs exist because they fulfill a demand that other people have, no matter how small that demand may be. Of course, society could survive without many jobs that exist today, but society could survive without many things (in fact, society could survive without all things that are not existential needs). That doesn't mean that these things aren't demands that can be supplied.
And the good thing about the economy is: Human needs are infinite(*). That means, there will always be something new to produce. I don't have any idea how a future economy might look like, just like I couldn't have predicted the economy of 2000 if I would have lived in 1900. But here are two things that I think could easily happen:
- Space economy could become big. Space tourism, asteroid mining, astrobiology (studying possible lifeforms and biotopics in space), space cartography (finding and mapping stars and planets), asteroid detection and protection, space law and others. Millions of people could be employed there.
- Virtual reality could hit off. Developers could create entire VR parks that are visited everyday by millions of people who want to experience another worlds (theme parks could include the Middle Ages, the World Wars, living the life of a modern-age celebrity, etc.). The VR economy could employ millions.
These are just examples of what could happen in the future. There will never be "no jobs" and masses of unemployed people. Humans are creative enough to always find new needs that need workers to be fulfilled. That doesn't mean that there won't be big changes in the job market, of course. The biggest changes will be: We will very probably work fewer hours (we could have a 20-hour work week in 2100) and many of todays small tasks will be automated.
(*)Human needs are infinite, but material things in the world are not infinite. But human needs are not only material (look at the entertainment industry), and, more importantly, with new technologies we don't need to use more materials for creating more goods and services. For example, if we manage to have nuclear fusion someday, we could provide energy for trillions of humans in all of the solar system with a relative small amount of water that exists on Earth.
Argument: "But what if robots become able to do EVERYTHING someday? Isn't there the danger that the poor will become all unemployed and starve to death without an UBI?"
No. If robots will be someday able to do everything that humans do - which i think will take very, very long (centuries, if not millennia) - there are two possible outcomes. Both are not dangerous for humans. One is realistic, the other one unrealistic.
The unrealistic outcome: The robots do everything for free for everyone. They grow food, build houses and streets, produce all necessary materials and even do all the bureaucratic tasks. No one has to work anymore. Everyone lives a life without wageslaving and still has everything he or she needs to survive. Basically the paradise. This is unrealistic because the robots will most likely have private owners, and the owners won't give everything for free for others.
The realistic outcome: The robots will do everything for free only for the rich. The rich will have all their food, houses, other possessions an so on provided by the robots and don't need to pay any worker any money. What happens then? Of course, the non-rich will grow food the traditional way, you know, with agriculture; the non-rich will build houses the traditional way, you know, with workers instead of robots; and they will do all the other things the traditional way.
Why would the non-rich become poor and starve to death because of automation? It makes no sense. The non-rich will not forget how to grow food just because the rich will have their robots who grow food for them. It's literally impossible that anyone will starve in an industrialized country if not for solely political reasons that lead to food shortages (war, socialist economic planning).
So, no matter what happens, there will be no need for an UBI, and there will be no mass unemployment and starvation because of automation. The job market will change for sure, but jobs will very much do exist. And with it, some jobs will pay more than others, some people will be rich, other poor, social classes will continue to exist. Money and status will continue to be an important part of SMV.
TL;DR:
- Automation kills jobs, but this frees up resouces that can and will be used for new sectors that will create new jobs.
- Human needs are infinite, so there will be always be new sectors that can emerge.
- Even if robots become able to do EVERYTHING someday, humans won't starve, they will either never have to work again or continue to produce all the things they need with the traditional methods.
Last edited:
